Skip to main content
Figure 3 | Critical Care

Figure 3

From: When do confounding by indication and inadequate risk adjustment bias critical care studies? A simulation study

Figure 3

Rates of falsely concluding a beneficial treatment (odds ratio = 0.8) caused no benefit (false negative) or statistically significant harm (false harm) among simulated cohort studies. (A) Rates in low confounding scenarios of n = 1,000. (B) Rates in high confounding scenarios of n = 1,000. (C) Rates in low confounding scenarios of n = 10,000. (D) Rates in high confounding scenarios of n = 10,000. AUROC, area under the receiver operator characteristic curve.

Back to article page

Critical Care

ISSN: 1364-8535